Review roadmap choices without letting the loudest request, recent event or prior investment define value.
Open situation →Reasoning Practice · Intermediate
Too much code to stop now
A feature has consumed eight months of work. New research shows limited demand, but the team argues that stopping would waste the investment.
Your decision
Which question should drive the next decision?
Show the best first move
B. Would we fund the remaining work today, based on future cost, value and uncertainty?
Why this move helps
Past work cannot be recovered. The incremental-value check evaluates only the future consequences of continuing, stopping or changing direction.
Evidence still missing
- Remaining cost and delivery risk.
- Current evidence of future value.
- Switching and cancellation consequences that still lie in the future.
Evidence note
Escalation of commitment is a plausible lens because past investment is used as a reason for further investment. Relevant future switching costs should not be ignored.
Next action
Write a future-only business case for the next release step.
Best first lens
Escalation of Commitment
Use the lens to ask a better question. It does not prove that a person or team has a cognitive bias.
Other defensible lenses
The situation may have more than one explanation.
Continue the path
Situation → skill → technique → action.
You can make a decision without pretending uncertainty has disappeared.
Build this skill →Evaluate the next step using future cost and value rather than resources already spent.
Run the technique →